2007 Porsche Cayman Base Hatchback 2-door 2.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche Cayman, Boxster caught in GTS trim

A few months ago, we reported on some leaked information from an internal presentation for upcoming Porsche models. This included details about the Macan and the 911 Targa, which we now know to be true, but there was also talk about GTS versions of the Cayman and Boxster.
Well, it appears we're now getting our first look at these GTS models, as our spy photographers have just snapped a pair of Porsche prototypes out testing - one Cayman and one Boxster.
Right off the bat, we can see that both GTS-branded cars will get a slightly tweaked exterior with new fascias (bringing LED daytime running lights to the Cayman) and air diffusers at the rear. The true gem of these cars will be the added horsepower to the tune of 340 horsepower - a 15-hp bump. A manual transmission will likely be standard, as will Porsche Active Suspension Management (PASM).

We get wet with Porsche's Cayman GT4 and 911 GT3 RS

In case you missed them, we recently published our First Drive impressions on the super-hot 2016 Porsche Cayman GT4 and the 2016 Porsche 911 GT3 RS. Spoiler alert: they're lovely. In order to properly test these new machines, Porsche let senior editor Alex Kierstein loose on Road Atlanta. But rather than a blissful day of warm, dry conditions, this test session proved to be a super gross experience. The track was soaked. But that didn't stop Kierstein from manhandling both coupes with confidence. Credit where credit's due, Alex said the tires on the GT3 RS were absolutely amazing, and proved helpful for getting the most out of the most hardcore 911 in these incredibly damp conditions. Have a look at Kierstein's experience in both cars, in the video above. We can't wait to get these bad boys out on some dry roads.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.